On the 18th of February, the 6th edition of the Amsterdam Aviation Collectors Fair (or AACF) was held in the Van der Valk hotel Schiphol. With more than 250 tables, 129 exhibitors and 1200+ visitors, it was again a huge success. Vintage & diecast scalemodels, safetycards, actual planeparts and lots of other aviation related items, there was something for every collector in the world. Just like last year, I had two tables to sell a large part of my 1/400 collection. I came with 5 crates full of boxes and went home with 3.5, a result I'm happy with. Ofcourse I bought some things aswell: 3 diecast models, an airplane tag from a Martinair MD-11 and a book with pictures of historic KLM aircraft. But that's not all I took home with me, because I won two prizes with the tombola aswell: a clock, of which the backplate comes from a Fokker 100, and a Thomas Cook A320 plastic model, which you got after not winning anything 10 times. One ticket costs €1, so with a little bit of luck you actually get great value! There were lots of returning exhibitors and collectors. It's great to meet the people you talk to online and a fair like AACF is the perfect place to do so! Some people just like collecting models, and some have been in the aviation industry for decades, so lots of stories to be told. One of the highlights was the reveal of the next Diecast Trading exclusive release: a 1/200 Martinair Cargo B747-400 PH-MPS (using the JCwings mould). This particular aircraft has been made by Inflight200 back in 2016 and would go for crazy prices whenever one pops up secondhand, mainly because it's the last remaining aircraft wearing the Martinair livery, and ofcourse because it's a 747. The nextx edition will be held at the same venue on the 23rd of February 2025 and tables are already being booked. Perhaps it will be even larger than this years edition, so I hope to see you again next year! A big shoutout to the organizers: Patrick, Rutger, Arjan and Matthijs. - Mark Retrohangar Diecast on Instagram Mark22 on MAF, 400SH, DAC and DIMA Want to collaborate or let me review your product? Send me a message via the channels mentioned above! Pictures by Anton B.

When I got back into collecting 1:400 die-cast airplanes around 2019, one of the first models I got was Swissair MD-11 HB-IWI by JC Wings, which had been recently released. Fast forward a few years to late 2023 and Phoenix Models releases two more MD-11s in the same classic Swissair chocolate bar livery. Being pretty happy with my JC Wings model I initially passed on the Phoenix's reiterations. But eventually, I gave in and got a copy of HB-IWA, Swissair's first MD-11. Besides having a different registration from the model I already had, the Phoenix MD-11 also has some slight livery variations. It has vertical MD-11 logos on the inboard side of the winglets and, most notably, a sticker aft of the fuselage titles commemorating the 700th anniversary of the Swiss Confederation. Additionally, it correctly omits the satcom antenna that the JC, also correctly, has on top of the fuselage. Those elements place the aircraft in 1991. The JC Wings example wears a pretty generic version of the chocolate bar livery, with seemingly rare unmarked upper winglets. Before we compare the models let's get a feel of how a real Swissair MD-11 in the chocolate bar livery should look like. Real Swissair MD-11 And now the models. Models Thoughts I love how the bright red pops on the elegant fuselage titles and the tail. The two-tone brown cheatline and silver belly make for a striking classic livery of the eighties and early nineties. One thing that is mentioned a lot on the die-cast airplane model social media groups about the Phoenix MD-11 is that its nose gear is too long. And it is certainly longer than JC's. But, by the same token, the JC one seems to have a bit of a nose-down attitude. So, pick your poison. I wouldn't call it a deal breaker for either. In the photo above you can also see that Phoenix completely painted the intake area of engines 1 & 3 in brown, including the lips, whereas JC painted the lips silver and placed the brown band aft of them. In the photo below you can see that Swissair did paint a thick brown band aft of the lip of the wing-mounted engines on their MD-11s, but there was a thin bare metal band forward of it. Most civilian jet engines have bare metal intake lips due to technical reasons. With that in mind, I tend to side with JC on this one. Oversized bare metal intake lips are better than complete omission. But I can also see how the Phoenix version might resemble the look of the real aircraft better, especially in 1:400 scale. Choose your poison again. The tail is another area of contention, as you can see in the photo below. Phoenix went through the trouble of replicating the faint two tones of silver present on the intake of the number two engine but left the exhaust region quite crude, whereas JC did the opposite. However, I think JC's nailed the proportions of the number 2 engine intake lip despite it not being as detailed as Phoenix's. JC's Swiss Cross is also better than Phoenix's, but what puts the nail in the coffin on Phoenix's tail is the QC. If you scroll back up, or down, and find a photo of the starboard side of the model, you will notice a sizable paint ship on the intake lip (I was able to repair it) and visible red paint inside the intake duct itself. Also, the leading edge of the vertical stabilizer appears to have been applied using masking tape, not a bad job though, but it's not nearly as neat as JC's effort. We have a winner here, nice tail JC. In the photo below I also noticed that JC's winglets are more refined. On the underside, both models offer a similar amount of accurate detail, but there are some interesting differences. Looking at the photo comparison above you can see that the JC Wings model has two static ports below the L2 passenger door (those tiny dark grey dots), but the Phoenix one only has the one that is positioned aft and lower. Turns out JC is correct in that there are two static ports on real MD-11s, but the one that Phoenix omitted was very faint on Swissair aircraft. Similar to the engine lip situation, Phoenix omitted a small detail to better recreate the look of the real aircraft. I prefer JC's approach. There are some access panels between the cheatline and the nosewheel. Phoenix's representation stands out, while JC went with a very discreet approach (they are there). Interestingly, Phoenix nicely molded in the NACA scoops and other intakes on the under-nose area, whereas JC only printed those details. To finish off on the bottom side of these models, I will say that I prefer JC Wings' landing gear legs and tire hubs' flat grey color over Phoenix's silver. Again, hardly a deal breaker. One last area that I want to talk about is the overwing markings. I normally would not have paid much attention to this area, but since they are so obviously different between the two models, I had to dig deeper. I hope Mr. Duncan Stewart does not mind me borrowing his photo below (click on it to go to the source). While JC didn't completely nail the overwing and horizontal stabilizer details, it came a whole lot closer than Phoenix. JC's engine pylons also offer more accurate detail. By looking at the top of the models I also noticed that the ADF antennas are painted black on the JC Wings model, but not on the Phoenix one. It is worth noting that the Phoenix mold does have the ADF bumps molded in on top of the fuselage, they just didn't bother to paint them. Wrapping Up I discovered a lot of interesting details about the MD-11 and the Swissair chocolate bar livery while writing this post. It was also a perfect opportunity to pull my "old" JC Wings Swissair MD-11 out of its shelf for some photos, which is something I've always wanted to do with this beautiful model. I like both of my Swissair MD-11s and intend to display them together for many years to come. But the question always is: which one will I keep if I was forced to let one go? I think the answer is the JC Wings one in this case. For someone looking to add a Swissair choco-MD-11 to their collection, I would say just get one of the recent Phoenix ones. Since both manufacturers made nice and similar models, I'd guess that once the Phoenix ones are gone from retailers, all of them, including the JC one, will likely go for about the same price in the second-hand market. Speaking of which, West Coast Diecast still has both recent Phoenix Swissair MD-11s in stock. You can use code yv400 for a 5% discount while earning loyalty points if you have an account with them. Combine that with their free shipping on large orders in Canada and the U.S. Not a bad deal.

And yet again, another recent release of an American Airlines model in the Vignelli livery, this time by good old Aeroclassics, comes to join a previous Dragon Wings version in my collection. As of the writing of this article, American Airlines is the most represented airline in my 1:400 collection. They had an enormous presence throughout the Americas when I was growing up, and I flew extensively on them. Hence, AA jets from the 1990s in the Vignelly livery satisfy multiple criteria in my collection. Keep'em coming! Contestant Number 1: Aircraft: American Airlines Boeing 767-223ER Reg.: N303AA Brand: Aeroclassics Release Date: January 2024 Contestant Number 2: Aircraft: American Airlines Boeing 767-223ER Reg.: N301AA Brand: Dragon Wings Release Date: 2000-2001 (DiMA) Together Real AA 762 Thoughts Even with all the room for improvement it has, the Aeroclassics one is easier on my eyes. The Dragon Wings 767-200 mold is not as handsome as its bigger brothers (-300/-400). This is common with DW, the smaller the type, the poorer it looks, generally speaking. Keep in mind that in 2000 that was the standard in 1:400 scale, and the only thing that DW models could be compared with back then would have been Herpa Wings 1:500, which were noticeably inferior. Overall the DW is a good mold, but the unrefined nose, which in this model is accentuated by the cockpit windows placed too low, takes a lot of points away from it. It is what it is with Aeroclassics. Very nice model, but there are a few areas that I will talk about below. Also, there are some QC issues in the form of paint patches and glue blobs. Also, there is a bizarre fuselage deformation on the sides above where the wings are fitted. The model seems squished. Landing Gear: The Achilles heel of Dragon Wings models has always been their crude landing gear, and this model is no exception. Aeroclassics' landing gears have also historically been criticized, especially their lack of tire hubs. The 767-200, nonetheless, is one of the few Aeroclassics molds that have been fitted with some rather nice tire hubs. However, it results in the nose gear tires looking oversized. Ah, the irony! Engines: For practical purposes, 767-200s have two engine options: General Electric CF6 and Pratt & Whitney PW4000. They look almost identical from the outside. American Airlines 762s were equipped with GE engines. Looking at the models in this article, seems like DW cut the nacelle too short. That leaves AC having the "most" correct engines as they seem to resemble the GEs better. However, AC engines are extremely unrefined. Ah, the irony! again! I hope you found this model comparison entertaining and informative.

*The first mass-produced model known to the everyday collector, that is. I'm sure corporate and custom jobs are out there. Drukair - Royal Bhutan Airlines is the state-owned flag carrier of Bhutan, a kingdom with a population of less than 1 million nested in the Himalayas. The airline is as modest as the country itself with a current fleet of only 5 aircraft: three A319s, one A320neo (the model released by Phoenix), and one ATR 42-600. When I first became aware of Drukair a few years ago its classic and colorful livery with a very 1990s look immediately caught my attention. I searched for a Drukair airplane model only to find out that there was not a single diecast offering in any scale. That was until Phoenix came to the rescue. The classic livery comes from the Bhutanese flag. The Druk, or Thunder Dragon in Dzongkha (Bhutan's official language), is part of Tibetan and Bhutanese mythology and a national symbol of Bhutan. In the Bhutanese flag, a white Druk sits in the middle of an evenly split yellow and orange background. The yellow represents the Dragon King of Bhutan, who traditionally has used a scarf of that color, and the orange represents Buddhism. The colors of the flag happen to match those of some popular liveries of the 1980s and 1990s (Iberia's Landor and Southwest's Mustard Rocket come to mind). It is nice to see those tones used in a current livery. The tail art is essentially the flag of Bhutan. The fuselage titles borrow the orange from the flag and are depicted in a custom font with a classic look that incorporates what seem to be subtle elements inspired by the Tibetan script. As far as I can tell, Phoenix did a wonderful job with the livery. Please enjoy: Jorge A. Zajia

Here we have two 767-323ERs produced by two well-known brands that don't cease to amaze. One of them because their recent release sets have been consistently full of newer versions of highly popular subjects, and the other one because of how well their twenty-something-year-old models stand up to today's product. Contestant Number 1: Aircraft: American Airlines Boeing 767-323ER Reg.: N377AN Brand: Phoenix Models Release Date: Summer 2023 The Phoenix 767-300 mold is highly praised as it is the only one that features slot-in wings out of the ones in use today. It is also a pretty good mold overall, as most 767-300s in 1:400 scale are. American is a popular airline and many collectors are after their "chrome" livery that was popular during the 1980s-2010s. GeminiJets had released an American 767-300 in this livery using this same Phoenix mold back in 2010 (pre-antenna era in 1:400) which has become rare and sought after (as you can see here). That model came with winglets though, but do not worry, Phoenix didn't stop with the model featured in this article, they went full on and also released one with winglets and another one in the One World c/s; all of them with current level of detail and antennas. The non-winglet version that I purchased looks excellent. And below a photo of the real aircraft represented by the model as it looked in the early 2000s, with the "Luxury Liner" titles on the nose area: The titles on the model appear to be not bold enough. Otherwise, looks very nice. Contestant Number 2: Aircraft: American Airlines Boeing 767-323ER Reg.: N351AA Brand: Dragon Wings Release Date: 2000 Dragon Wings produced no shortage of American Airlines models, but during the majority of my time as a collector, it was GeminiJets who had a monopoly in that market. GeminiJets works hard to protect the value of its collectibles while focusing on corporate deals with airlines and other aviation companies. That translates into plenty of current subjects released by them, while the output of classic subjects is a trickle at best. Needless to say, before NG and the rebellion of Phoenix, AA contemporary classics, including DW releases, appreciated well on the secondhand market. Still, DWs were the cheaper option, so I have plenty of their AA releases in my collection. As was the case with the majority of diecast models during those years, it was difficult to scale the landing gears properly. This in turn gave the wide-bodies, such as the 767, an upper arm. For a 24-year-old model, it looks remarkably well: And the real aircraft: Despite the model being painted (though a chrome metallic version exists) and lacking a lot of detail, DW seems to have done a better job with the boldness of the fuselage titles. Also, the DW wing-to-fuselage joint looks better. Together: In the picture above it is evident that the DW version has too much of a nose-up attitude (though If I'm being picky I'd say the Phoenix sits a tad too flat). This is probably just a byproduct of having chunky removable landing gear. DW also printed the cockpit windows a tad low - this is something that I have seen both manufacturers do from time to time. But look at how fine the edges of the windshield are on the DW example! Phoenix's got the overwing window exit pathway markings spot on. Also, as far as I can tell, Phoenix did an outstanding job with the placement of sensors, intakes, panels, and similar details all around, including the belly. The DW version is extremely crude in terms of details. But remember, the DW model was released 24 years ago when 1:400 scale was less than half a decade old; something that in itself can add value to the model. Wrapping Up Once again, I applaud Phoenix for their release choices; no-brainers if you ask me. American Airlines is very popular, particularly around my neck of the woods, and that chrome livery has joined the ranks of the most iconic paint schemes of contemporary commercial aviation. In this case, the Phoenix model is not replacing the old DW one in my collection, but it rather has become its wingman.

2023 is coming to an end, and with all manufacturers having announced their December releases, it's time to reflect back on the past year. There are already threads on the forums about what the best and worst model / release is, which is entirely subjective. So instead I will be taking an objective look at what manufacturer had the best releases. I will do this based on the amount of variety of the five main manufacturers: Aeroclassics, NG models, JCwings, GeminiJets and Phoenix. Massive thanks to Jorge for helping me out with calculating the scores. I will look at the following criteria: 1) Geography: how many regions are covered? 2) Aircraft types: how many different aircraft manufacturers are used? 3) Airlines: how many different airlines are used? 4) Modern/retro ratio: what is the ratio between modern and retro aircraft? Disclaimer! - Everyone has different collecting criteria, meaning that the results say nothing about one brand being the best or worst for all collectors. It only shows averages based on variety. - Everything is calculated in percentages, as otherwise manufacturers with larger releases would have a huge advantage from the start. - I did not take "future releases" into account as it would be very confusing to determine which model belongs to what month. Instead I looked at the full release lists posted on the forums and/or social media. - I did not look if a model has already been made before, as this would take a huge amount of time. Geography We start by rating the variety in geography. There are 7 regions I count seperately: Europe (including all of Russia and Turkey), North America (USA & Canada), Latin America, Asia, Africa, Oceania and the Middle East. For every region included in the release, the score goes up by 14,3%. More models usually means more regions covered, which is why NG is on top here with on average 5 regions each month. JCwings and Phoenix are in the middle with 4.5 regions on average and GeminiJets is on the bottom with 3.3. Not surprising as their releases are relatively small and targeted to the North American market. Aircraft types For this criteria the score goes up by 20% for every aircraft manufacturer included in a release. 5 different manufacturers is enough variety for 100%. This method is not as detailled as it could have been, but I did not have enough time to count actual aircraft types for every release. In this category it's clear that larger releases does not always equal more variety. Despite NG's releases being about twice as large as JCwings, they are still noticably behind when it comes to using their entire mould catalogue. I did not expect Aeroclassics to be this low, considering the large variety of moulds they have, but the most likely reason for this is that some of these moulds don't have many liveries left that sell well enough. Airlines This one is a little more complicated to explain, so let's use an example: When a release is 20 models and 2 models are of the same airline, there are 19 unique airlines and 1 duplicate, so the score is = 19/20*100 = 95% Here JCwings is again on top, but this time by a large margin, even approaching a perfect score. NG's strategy to split one livery into different registrations is not helping them here, but from a business perspective it makes perfect sense to not have one large batch of the exact same model. The other three manufacturers are close to eachother, but nothing unexpected. Modern/retro ratio Each manufacturer has both modern and retro moulds available. I consider any aircraft introduced before or in 1990 as retro, unless still in production like the A320. A ratio of 50/50 scores 100%, after that it goes down 1% for every point difference. For example: 39/61 = 22 points difference, score = 78%. For the first time the winner is Phoenix. GeminiJets and JCwings are not far off as they rougly have the same ratio of modern:retro moulds available. Aeroclassics is slightly behind, for obvious reasons, but still far ahead of NG. Despite having the moulds, they are barely using them, which is a huge shame as the quality is better than the competition. Winners and losers per criteria Now we know the scores, let's sum up who the winners and losers are for each criteria. Geography Best: NG models (72,7%) Worst: GeminiJets (46,5%) Aircraft types Best: JCwings (83,3%) Worst: Phoenix (58,3%) Airlines Best: JCwings (96,5%) Worst: NG models (73,7%) Modern/retro ratio Best: Phoenix (56,2%) Worst: NG models (17,8%) Who is the best overall? The graph below shows the overall score of each manufacturer: NG models is last with 59,4%. Aeroclassics is 60,5% and then GeminiJets with 61,2%. Phoenix is second place with 65,3% and the winner by far is JCwings with 74,3%! The scores are much closer than I expected with the bottom three being seperated by only 1,8%! 2023 from my perspective This year had lots of great models, but those I was seriously interested sometimes had major issues. Hopefully next year we will see less issues as prices continue to increase here in Europe. It's difficult to make decisions as it's very unlikely some of these models will ever be made again, but I refuse to pay today's prices for the quality of 20 years ago. Besides that there have been quite a few frustrating moments when the hints were promising, but I ended up dissapoined with re-releases over and over. Now on the more positive side; lots of new moulds have been introduced in 2023 (most of which are not modern twinjets!) and I have hope they will make the 400 scale more diverse again. Ignoring Gemini's very cheap B767-400 and NG's "B747 classic", there is clearly still interest by manufacturers to fill the market with new moulds that have the quality we may expect in 2024. Massive props (no pun intended) to JCwings for the AN-26 and AN-32, which for me are the best of all new moulds. I'm quite confident they have AN-24's in the pipeline aswell, perhaps even the AN-30? Despite skipping on some models, my wallet still lost plenty of weight (2023 releases only): 3x Aeroclassics DC-10 (Swissair, Hawaiian Express, RNLAF) 1x Aeroclassics B767-200 (Air New Zealand, Hangar Club exclusive) 1x Aeroclassics B737-200 (Wien Air Alaska) 1x Aeroclassics C-46 (Canadian Pacific) 1x Aeroclassics A320 (Kingfisher) 1x NG models L-1011 Tristar (Atlantic International) 1x JCwings B747-400 (KLM with Aviationtag) Predictions for 2024 Now we have the statistics for 2023, what do I predict for 2024? Aeroclassics I think Aeroclassics will be pretty much the same. Maybe one or two modifications or returning moulds, but the same amount of variety and quality. Hopefully some re-releases of sought after 747's, because we need those. NG models With the "Year of the classic" theme that was announced not long ago and recent mould announcements, I have hope we will see a lot more retro aircraft. Besides that I think the A330neo, A340-200/300, B747-400 and MD-80 will enter the market plus two new mould reveals: MD-11 and A340-600. JCwings Not much will change in 2024 if you ask me, but considering their deal with GeminiJets and their already good releases, not much change is needed in the first place as they have the best variety already. No more than one new mould revealed, but it's completely new in 400 scale. GeminiJets Nothing new for GeminiJets, just loads of American models with a few other random continents here and there. Phoenix One new mould, which is an addition to an existing aircraft type, but no improvements to other existing ones. The great variety stays, including a couple that fit my narrow buying criteria. Wishlist for 2024 Finally my wishlist 2024: Aeroflot AN-26 (JCwings / GeminiJets) Aeroflot AN-32 (JCwings) Aeroflot IL-18 prototype (Aeroclassics) Aeroflot TU-104 white/silver livery (Retro Models) Aeroflot TU-104 orange livery (Retro Models) Aeroflot IL-62 with KLM titles (GeminiJets, even with the wrong engines I would buy) KLM DC-7 diagonal striped tail (Aeroclassics) Transavia A300 (Aeroclassics) Transavia DC-6 (Aeroclassics) Martinair DC-7 (Aeroclassics) Martinair F28 (Aeroclassics) Martinair B747-400BCF PH-MPS latest scheme (JCwings) Pulkovo TU-154 (NG / Phoenix / Aeroclassics) Pulkovo IL-86 (JCwings) Air Pacific B737-200 rainbow livery (Aeroclassics) ~~~~~~ - Mark Retrohangar Diecast on Instagram Mark22 on MAF, 400SH, DAC and DIMA Want to collaborate or let me review your product? Send me a message via the channels mentioned above! All pictures are mine (unless stated otherwise) and may not be used without my permission!

This is an excellent model comparison opportunity since it involves two recent - almost simultaneous - releases of virtually the same aircraft, except for the registration, by two brands that have a strong following. However, one of the contenders happens to be my first model made by the most recent reincarnation of Aviation400. Because of this, this piece will also serve to share my opinion (spoiler alert: not a good one) of the brand that has captivated so many with its innovative level of detail and numerous gimmicks. My first 777-300s Before getting these models I had never owned a 77W replica in any scale. I prefer the proportions of the shorter -200 family, plus it fits better the classic leanings of my collection. However, living in Houston, it is easy to come up with excuses to add post-merger United models to my collection. While UA 77Ws don't currently visit IAH regularly, when they were introduced they were put on the IAH-LHR route for a bit. I also had the opportunity to fly on one under peculiar circumstances: In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, one of these birds (which still smelled like new) operated an airline-employee-only charter from IAH to ORD to take stranded employees to their homes, and others to work out of non-flooded hubs (I was in the latter group; at the time I was flying for a UAX regional airline). So with that, I had more than a perfect excuse to drop some cash on get not one, but two long triple-sevens! The models came safely packed and in great shape from my friends at West Coast Diecast. Their selection, (most) prices, loyalty rewards program, and free shipping on large orders to the U.S. and Canada, make them a good option. Check them out! Let the Battle Begging! Below are photos of the two models, and their boxes, grouped according to the angle they show. I also sprinkled some real 77W photos in there just to get a general sense of which model better replicates the real aircraft. Boxes While it is the content of the box that matters, and I do buy models without their original box as long as the condition is good and the model is priced accordingly, if boxes are present it is fair game to throw them in for comparison. NG is well-known for using sturdy boxes with stylish designs, and this one is no exception. Something that caught my attention was that the United titles and the aircraft name "New Spirit of United" do not contrast too well with the blue portions of the enlarged Continental Globe that serves as background. I don't know what to think about the Aviation400 box design. At least it has all the important information prominently displayed on it. Aircraft Looking at the profile pictures above looks like the titles on the NG example are a bit compressed vertically. While the colors on both models look fine to me, it seems that AV400 might be closer to what the real thing looks like. I do like NG's engine profile better, as well as their cockpit window printing. The sockets for the rear-facing white nav lights on the tip of the blended winglets look oversized on the AV4000 example, as do most of their other accessories (antennae, beacon/jewels, etc). From the angle of the photos above it is evident that NG's wing joint is much more refined and realistic than AV400's effort. Below is one of my photos of a 77W at IAH that supports my observation. In the two photos above seems like AV400's horizontal stabilizer joint resembles the real thing better, though it doesn't fit as neatly as NG's. The angle of the photos above is always flattering and both both models look fine from that vantage point. The fuselage shape of the NG one looks better to me though. NG wins when the models are seen from the front. I have seen some collectors state that the fuselage of the AV400 77W is not wide enough, and I think that is correct. Oh yes, AV400 has see-through engines and that is nice, but it doesn't help if the overall look of the airplane is off. And of course, I could not talk about these two models without highlighting the tilting main landing gear trucks that the AV400 77W comes with. It does look nice, but with the flaps fully retracted, and the nose landing gear strut compressed, having the main landing gear in an extended-in-flight position is as unrealistic as it gets. The stand I used to take the two photos above is the one that comes included with the AV400 model, which is a nice carryover from the original Aviation400. Wrapping Up The two models are very nice, and scrutinizing them is nothing but another way to enjoy them and appreciate the level of accuracy and detail that these models have. However, there is a model I prefer: the NG Models one. Despite the AV400 having the upper hand in the title font and, maybe, the colors, the overall look of the NG example is more refined and sober, and the model as a whole is ultimately easier on my eyes. AV400 numerous oversized details, including the beacon jewel, combined with the unrefined cockpit windows, wing joints, and engines make it seem as if they are trying to enhance a rather ordinary product with gimmicks; smoke and mirrors if you will. It does not help that my experience with the original Aviation400 was not what you would call memorable (though they are the brand behind the number one subject in my current "most-wanted list," the Lan Chile 747-100). From what I can see the essence of the original Aviation400 is alive and well in this modern version of the brand. Now, if you are a collector who is fascinated by tilting main landing gear bogies, lights represented with jewels, and tons of molded-in details in 1:400 scale, that's alright. I have to admit that I never thought I would see such features in these tiny models and I applaud AV400 for trying to raise the bar. However, excessive level of detail is just not the main reason I collect airplane models. Plus, I think many of the features AV400 has added to its 77W need to be refined. I have heard that their A380 is indeed a true masterpiece of 1:400 scale, and maybe the larger size of the aircraft lends itself better to the amount of detail AV400 seems to specialize in. Keep in mind that I am just speaking based on my experience with this United 77W. Jorge A. Zajia

Phoenix Models has made it clear: they are not afraid of releasing contemporary classic airliners in 1:400 scale. A nice 767, MD-11, 747, or A340 from the eighties or nineties - the sort of stuff that Aeroclassics was doing about a decade ago, but today are pretty difficult to find for a sensible price - Phoenix has got you covered. Among those models is a rather nice Canadi>n 767-300 in their elegant first livery from the late eighties. Let's see how well Phoenix did with this one. Aircraft Info. Operator: Canadian International Airlines (Canadi>n Airlines) Type: Boeing 767-375ER Reg: C-FCAB Operational history (thanks to rzjets.net): Delivered to Canadian International Airlines on April 15, 1988. To Air Canada in March 2001 due to merger. WFU in late 2017 and now broken up. Model Info. Brand: Phoenix Models Scale: 1/400 Release date: May 2023 Photo Comparisons They say an image is worth a thousand words. So, see it for yourself and decide: Conclusion One of the things that I first noticed about this model was that the cockpit windows were printed just a tiny tad too low. It is noticeable, but it is so minimal that it does not ruin the model. Equally minuscule, the red chevron on the tail could be moved a tiny tad forward, though it is fine how it is. The forward wing/fuselage joint is also crude on the model. However, it is no worse than any other current 767-300 in 1:400 scale. And, we have to remember this is, after all, a 1:400 scale model we are talking about. Otherwise, the artwork is spot-on, and the mold is very nice. Sure, NG has something in the works, but it still is in its developing phase, and they don't have a very good track record of utilizing their molds in a way that satisfies the collectorate. If you are interested in purchasing this model I'd invite you to check out West Coast Diecast. They sold out the first batch, but as of the writing of this article have managed to get some on restock and they have two left. They sell Phoenix Models for good prices and offer free shipping to Canada and the U.S. on orders over $175CAD/$130US. Jorge A. Zajia

For an aviation collectibles enthusiast, the best collectibles show is the one held in your hometown. Simply being able to drive (or walk, or take the train or bus... Oh! nevermind, this is Houston I'm talking about...) to a place where I can get airplane models and bring them back home with me right then and there is a nice break from the online shopping era and a nice throwback to the times when a trip to the model shop (yes, there used to be such places here in town) was something to look forward to. That alone makes the local Houston Airline Collectibles Show one of the most anticipated events of the year for me. Anyone with some familiarity with the aviation collectibles show circuit in the U.S. will tell you that the Houston show, similar to many of the local shows, with some exceptions such as Chicago, Dallas, and Atlanta, is rather small. This is why I have decided to combine photos of multiple shows over the years to build up this article. I have seen the attendance of the Houston show fluctuate from being not much more than a gathering of local collectors to being a buzzing market full of visitors from all over the South Texas region and beyond. The most recent show on November 4th, 2023 looked pretty decent to me. 2023 Show: All the previous shows that I had attended were held at the 1940 Air Terminal Museum at Hobby Airport on the southeast side of the city. The 2023 show was held at a Holliday Inn hotel by George Bush Intercontinental Airport on the north side of the city, which meant that my drive time to the show doubled up this year. Luckily, a nice fall day and the slow Saturday morning traffic made for a very pleasant trip. Some familiar faces: Scale Models! Mainly 1:400, my favorite offering! In past years, diecast scale models were not always so prominent at the show, but recently that has changed with the appearance of a local retailer, The Texan Airplane Store, and with LA-Center becoming a regular. A portion of Michael Bludworth's setup. A very well-known local aviation collector and historian. One of the cool things about these shows is that you never know what you are going to find. For me, one of the most rewarding finds came in the form of a large selection of timetables, which helped me in my casual research of airlines that served Venezuela. 2022 Show: This show was held at the 1940 Air Terminal Museum on the grounds of Hobby Airport. It was the first show that The Texan Airplane Store attended, and it yielded some nice finds in 1:400 scale for me! 2009 Show: Another Houston show of which I have photos is the 2009 one. It was the first aviation collectibles show I attended, and my first time visiting the 1940 Air Terminal Museum. From what I remember the show was moderately sized, but there were hardly any 1:400 scale models (what I was after) available. I did find a very special 1:500 bargain, as you will see later. Since it was my first visit to the 1940 Air Terminal Museum, I spent most of the time wandering around the actual museum and not in the show. I was shocked to find this large framed photo of a Pan Am L1011 at Maiquetía Airport. Later I would find out the photo was used on the front cover of a menu (of which I now own a copy). It was Pan Am's inaugural L1011 flight from JFK to CCS on May 1st, 1980. The aircraft was N504PA "Clipper National Eagle." While there were effectively no 1:400 models at that show, I did find a copy of the model that got me into all this: the first-generation Viasa DC-10-30 made by Herpa in 1:500 scale. I stumbled across 1:400 scale while searching for that very model, the rest is history. In those years that model was pricey and hard to find on eBay, but this copy was a mere $5.00 with no shipping or taxes to worry about, just plain old take your cash give me my airplane model. What a nice souvenir from my first airline collectible show. As I have grown more committed and passionate about the hobby of airline collectibles I have made the effort to attend larger shows in other cities. Besides the Houston show, in 2023 I also attended Airliners International in Dallas and the Amsterdam Aviation Collectors Fair. Still, everything I stated in the first paragraph holds true. Cover photo: Jorge A. Zajia

My interest in retro airliners was mostly focussed on western aircraft, but in the past few months I have been more interested in Soviet aircraft instead. Normally I avoid fully plastic models as they often feel very cheap while being rather expensive, but unfortunately there is no diecast AN-10 mould, so I had no choice but to get this one by Kum Models. With 60 grams it weighs about the same as a 1/400 diecast TU-144. Who is Kum Models? It is unknown who is behind the brand Kum Models. I contacted Herpa but they have not replied yet. Their models are produced by the Art Model Association (or AMA). They have a factory in Kiev, Ukraine, which produces plastic vehicle models / toys in 1/87 scale, mostly from World War 2 and the Cold War. They also make 1/200 plastic aircraft models, including the AN-10 and AN-12, for Herpa, Aviaboss and Kum Models. This explains the similarity in the box and stand design. Background information The Antonov AN-10 was developed from the AN-8 in the 1950's as a passenger aircraft. The first flight was in 1957 and two years later it was taken into service by Aeroflot. 104 aircraft were build, of which the last retired in 1974. The AN-12 was developed as a militairy version of the AN-10 and was much more succesful (it's still in use today!). The CCCP-11169 was delivered to Aeroflot in August 1959 and flew for 10 years. In October 1969 it got damaged beyond repair during landing at a snowy Mirny Airport, Russia. The fuselage could still be found at Mirny Airport in 2016, where it was used as a shed. It's unknown whether it's still there. Review There are 6 parts that will be given between 1 and 10 points, 1 being the lowest and 10 being perfect. In the end the average of these scores will be the final score. I have updated the score bar as after a couple reviews I realized it takes a lot to be in the red "not recommended" zone. Now the colors fit better with the scorings. Accuracy of colors There are very few coloured pictures of this livery, but in the image above it's still in decent condition. It features a white top, grey belly, thick blue cheatline with two thin white cheatlines inbetween. The same blue color is used on the tail and propellor blades. Although slightly difficult to judge from the picture, the colors seem to be replicated well. The propellors on the model are black, but on the picture of the actual (crashed) aircraft the propellors look darker than the paint on the fuselage, suggesting it was black aswell instead of blue. The engines have a red color on the tip, but on the pictures above it's either yellow or without color. Everything else seems to be accurate. Score: 9 / 10 Livery The livery consists of a blue cheatline with a wing behind the cockpit, a lightning bolt towards the rear and a triangle on the tail. The wing on the front is obviously wrong. There should be no white space between the cockpit windows and the blue edges should be much much thinner across the entire fuselage. The "feathers" should stretch further to the rear aswell. The triangle on the tail seems totally fine. The cheatline is also placed at the correct height and ends nicely under the black antiglare screen. The white cheatlines are too fat. Score: 5 / 10 Logos, titles and stickers Because of the very poor design of the wing, it becomes a little difficult to judge how well all other elements around it are placed. The Aeroflot logo is placed too low and should be more towards the nose. The Aeroflot titles have the wrong font aswell. There are red "AN-10A" titles, which should be "AN-10" instead. There should be a Soviet flag on the tail, but on the model it's just a red square. Considering other small details on the model like the Aeroflot logo, it surely should have been possible to add at least something yellow to make it resemble the flag. The registration is also not very well replicated. The "CCCP" and "11169" should not be above the rear door and the font is not completely right either. Score: 2 / 10 Other details There aren't many other details on this model. On the picture above there are 2 windows on the right side of the rear door, but I believe they shouldn't be there at all. The window in the rear door is not centered either and the triangular cockpit window should be smaller. There are some details around the geardoors, which is nice, but nothing spectacular. Something very nice is that the nosecone is transparent, just like in real life. Score: 5,5 / 10 Paint and printing QC Overall the paint and printing quality is good. There is too much paint on the belly, making the main landing geardoors barely visible. The grey paint also gets damaged easily where it contacts the plastic blister, but luckily I could remove most of the smudges. Score: 8,5 / 10 Mould QC Overall the mould looks very good. The seams from the wing and gears are neat and they clearly put effort in the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. The transparent nosecone also fits very well. Some wheels spin, but not all. The propellors are also rather stiff. The model tilts to the right when sitting on the stand. Score: 9 / 10 Conclusion Some may think I'm too critical for a plastic model, but I paid €60 for it and the latest releases are €70-€80 (with the same flaws), which is the same as some diecast narrowbodies! Assuming that plastic is cheaper and it's more easy to add details in the mould, this model is way too overpriced. Even the plastic blister is so cheap and weak that it can easily damage the paint. Aviaboss made the same livery on the same mould back in 2015 and did a much better job with the livery and details, so if you can find it, take that one over this Kum Models release. The total score is 39 / 6 = 6.5, which is okay if you really want an AN-10 model, but in my opinion not worth it. I got the AN-12 CCCP-11014 from Kum Models aswell and the quality control is horrible, so I highly recommend to stay away from this brand, unless you can find one with good QC for half the price. - Mark Retrohangar Diecast on Instagram Mark22 on MAF, 400SH, DAC and DIMA Want to collaborate or let me review your product? Send me a message via the channels mentioned above! All pictures are mine (unless stated otherwise) and may not be used without my permission!

While American Airlines operated a fair number of 747-100s (we are going to leave the SPs out of this), the type is not generally associated with the airline. These jumbos were part of AA's fleet during the seventies and the first half of the eighties, but many of them were converted to freighters and/or leased to other airlines during that time frame. Additionally, at the time American was far from being the global carrier it is today, and the Jumbos were almost exclusively used on domestic routes in the U.S. and its territories. Nonetheless, there is something special about the Jumbo Jet when it wears the livery of the airline that bears the name of the same nation that produced such an iconic aircraft. Because of this, the 747-100 is the most represented type in my AA collection, with 4 examples, even though it is the only type of AA aircraft in my collection that I never got to see in real life; I just have to have them. Let's take a look at these four models and see what can we learn from them: 1) 747-121 N743PA by BigBird (400 Scale Hangar Club Exclusive) This is one of two Pan Am 747-121 leased to American Airlines in 1970 before the airline started taking deliveries of their own jumbos. The aircraft was leased to American immediately after its delivery in March of 1970 and flew with the airline for six months before going back to Pan Am, with whom it served until 1989. During its time with AA the airplane wore a hybrid c/s retaining the Pan Am white top, creating a unique and exotic look as a result. Other operators included Tower Air and Logistic Air. After a rather interesting journey across the planet, the airframe wound up at an off-airport site in Kempas, Malaysia where it is planned to be used as a hotel or restaurant, along with another abandoned 747. Here is a cool video about it. The model was released in 2005, and I got mine in 2023. Blue Box used the same reg. to release a Pan Am model in 2006 wearing the billboard livery carrying the name "Clipper Black Sea," one of two names it wore while with Pan Am ("Clipper Derby" being the other one). 2) 747-123 N9664 by Dragon Wings This was the 4th 747-123 delivered new to American Airlines, an event that took place on August 27, 1970. It flew for AA all the way until May, 1984 when it was leased to Avianca. Subsequent operators included Cargolux and United Airlines, with whom it retired in 1998 as N154UA. The airframe was scrapped in the early 2000s This was the first non-freighter American Airlines 747-100 produced in 1:400 scale in 2000-2001. I got my example in 2023. 3) 747-123F N9673 by Jet-X (Dragon Wings mold) American took delivery of N9673 in April 1971. It was the 13th 747-123 delivered new to AA and was also the third one to be converted to a freighter just a few years afterward in July 1976. It continued to operate as a -123F wearing the American Freighter titles that the model displays until mid-1984 when it went to Orion Air, a predecessor of UPS Airlines, as N673UP. In 1989 it flowed right into the newly created UPS Airlines. In 2003 it went to Kalitta as N717CK. The airframe was retired in 2010 and scrapped a few years later. This was the first non-SP American Airlines 747 released in 1:400 scale in 2000. I got my example in 2021. 4) 747-123 N9674 by GeminiJets On May 12, 1971 N9674 became the 14th out of a total of 16 747-123s that were delivered new to American. It flew for AA until December of 1983. It then went to Pan Am retaining the same reg. Subsequent operators included Tower Air, UPS, and Polar Air Cargo. It did not receive its freighter conversion until 1995. It retired with Polar as N859FT in December 2001. The airframe has since been broken up. This is the most recent American Airlines 747-100 in 1:400 scale. It was produced in 2013, and I got mine new that same year. When American started to expand its international network to Europe during the eighties, it did so mainly with the help of the DC-10-30, which quickly became complemented, and eventually replaced, by 767s, and A300s to a lesser extent, as ETOPS gained traction. The 747 rejoined the fleet briefly in the late 80s in the form of two SPs that were strategically acquired to be used in some newly awarded ultra-long-haul routes to Japan. In the early 90s the 747SPs were replaced with MD-11s. Today a combination of 777s and 787s take care of the airline's comprehensive long-haul global network. Jorge A. Zajia

Even though the sun is finally setting for the 747, today it continues to be an icon of commercial air travel. A revolutionary aircraft with an enormous impact on society, and easily the one that has been replicated the most in the form of toys and scale models. There are many 747 variants and sub-variants. Let's take a look at some of the most popular molds in 1:400 scale of the first version of the type, the early production -100 and -200, and see how they compare. Molds 1) BigBird: First appearing in 2003 models made with this mold have been marketed as YourCrafstman400, BigBird, Witty Wings, Apollo, Aeroclassics (and their sub-brands), JC Wings, and who knows what else. Today the mold belongs to JC Wings, and they use it with some regularity. The majority of their recent releases, though coming in boxes whose design matches that of JC Wings', are being marketed as YourCraftsman400 (which is interchangeable with BigBird), giving a new life to the iconic brand name that seemed to be extinct. The mold has gone through some minor tweaking, and its current version is often referred to as BigBird Mark 3. However, it is still fundamentally the same mold that first appeared in 2003 plus antennas and modern printed details. In fact, when Aeroclassics uses the mold, which still happens once in a blue moon (some are buried in the pipeline as we speak), they don't add all the details of the Mk.3 version. The mold is a favorite of many. Besides sporting a beautiful front section (though it might not be entirely accurate, as I will point out later), and a very decent body, a major contributor to its popularity is the fact that it has been used to produce an unmatched array of globally acclaimed classics. 2) GeminiJets: The original version of this mold dates to 1999, but it has been improved considerably. The mold is still active, in fact, a new Air Force One VC-25A just arrived at stores last week. However, its use has been extremely sporadic in recent times (only a release every several years). It is a very nice mold, and several gems have also been produced using it, such as the American Airlines example below. The most current version of the mold sports antenas on the fuselage, and modern tire hubs. 3) Dragon Wings: This mold is almost as old as the GeminiJets one and was also used extensively to produce models for Jet-X. It was never updated, and it's no longer in use as Dragon Wings left the business of 1:400 airliners during the early 2010s. The mold, however, is very good, to the point that it is considered the best rendition of the jumbo in 1:400 scale by a number of collectors. Its main weakness is the simplicity of its landing gear and other details. Dragon Wings 747s are very popular in the second-hand market and tend to hold their value well, with some being very sough-after, such as the Pan Am example below: 4) Aviation400: This mold is an improved version of the highly appraised BigBird tooling and was marketed under the Aviation400 banner, as well as InFlight400. The mold saw a relatively short career during the late 2000s and early 2010s. It is included in this article mainly for reference as it is considered the cream of the crop of the 747-100/200 molds in 1:400 scale, but it wasn't a major player. The mold retained the basic fuselage shape of the BigBird mold (as we will see later in this article), but the wing cradle piece was replaced with individual slot-in wings. The vertical fin and tail area were also refined. 5) Phoenix Models: In contrast with the other molds that have been mentioned thus far, this one doesn't have many fans. In spite of this, the mold has been particularly active in the 2021-2023 period, and many classic liveries are being released and re-released on it. While I agree with the general opinion the 1:400 scale collecting community has on the molds discussed above, I think we tend to get carried away by popular opinions and lose sight of the fact that the molds we put on a pedestal are really not all that great, and the ones we trash are not all that awful. The Real Deal On September 19, 2012 Space Shuttle Endeavour visited Houston on its way to its final resting place at the California Science Center. The relevant part of that story to this article is that the Shuttle came piggybacking on top of N905NA, a modified 747-123, and I took a lot of photos of it. I will use those photos in this article to compare the 1:400 molds that I listed above with a real 747-100. I am going to focus heavily on the nose section because it is the face of the airplane. While details pertaining to the rest of the airplane are also important, they can't make a model "good" if the front section is not up to standard. The opposite is not always true (the BigBird 747 can be considered a good example of this). At a glance and from a distance the nose and cockpit section of that 747-123 look sleek, don't they? Pretty much just like the nose on the BigBird 747-121 below: The BigBird 747 nose is indeed delightful. However, I don't think it is quite perfect, rather it is the idealistic 747 front section. In reality, the 747 front section is not as sleek and tidy, especially the cockpit. The 747 is the only Boeing jetliner built thus far in which the cockpit windshield does not coincide with the point where the flight deck ends and the nose cone begins (with the exception of the 787 which has no externally visible division between the cockpit and nose cone), as it is usually depicted on the BigBird mold. In the pictures below you can see that there is actually a small portion of fuselage skin below the windshield before the nose cone begins, giving the 747 a rugged look. The issue is that this is only evident when seen in profile, and from a relatively close distance. Angles, lighting, and the usual distances between airport terminal windows and aircraft tend to hide this feature. Now that we have established how the 747 front section, particularly the cockpit windshield and forehead, should look, let's discuss the front sections of the molds included in this article. In the photos above it is evident that GeminiJets and Dragon Wings placed the cockpit windshield accurately in the larger foreheads of their 747 molds. The forehead on the BigBird mold is too narrow, placing the cockpit windshield any higher will bring it too close to the roof (it has been done, as I will show later). It is difficult to decide which front section is better between Dragon Wings and GeminiJets, they are both great. So, what about Phoenix? There is no question that the Phoenix 747 nose cone is too blunt. However, where they place their cockpit windshield has a huge impact on the look of the model. Unfortunately, they have shown inconsistency in this area. The picture below shows a Phoenix 747-200 with the cockpit windshield printed right at the joint between the cockpit and the nose cone area (too low), just like BigBird does. Keep in mind that the Phoenix 747-200 mold has a larger forehead than the BigBird mold (just like the Dragon Wings and GeminiJets molds do, as shown above): And below is a photo showing a Phoenix 747-200 with the cockpit windows positioned more in line with the real aircraft. The photos below are just to show that the BigBird. Mk.3 and the Aviation400 747-200 molds share the same nose with the original BigBird mold from the early 2000s. The particular KLM BigBird Mk.3 example I used seems to have a slightly improved forehead, but I think it is simply the result of inconsistencies in the production line. As I mentioned, there have been attempts to print the cockpit windows a tad higher on the BigBird mold. Below you can see a 2014 Lufthansa example produced by Witty Wings/Apollo on the BigBird mold (Mk.2?). It does not look too bad, though certainly not as accurate as the GeminiJets and Dragon Wings examples shown earlier in this article, and the windshield does look squeezed in the narrow forehead of the mold. That does not prevent the magnificent lines of the BigBird nose cone from shining on this model: Rest of the Airplane And because there is more to the 747 than just the nose, here are some photos showing other parts of the airplane and the molds in question for you to make your own opinion of where things stand. Considerations and Personal Thoughts Engines: There are three basic engine types shown in this article. The engines on the British Airways models by Phoenix and InFlight400 (Aviation400) are the Rolls Royce RB211-524. The Alitalia (Baci c/s) and Lufthansa models, both on the BigBird mold, carry the General Electric CF6-50 engine. The rest of the models (Dragon Wings, GemininJets, Aeroclassics/BigBird), as well as the real aircraft (N905NA) all carry Pratt & Whitney JT9D engines. I think between Phoenix and Aviation400, the latter wins when it comes to the RB211-524, as well as pylons (Phoenix's are chunky and unrefined). The CF6-50s look rather nice on the BigBird mold. In contrast, I think the BigBird JT9Ds are the worst of the bunch with Dragon Wings being the best. Several pylons with curved/angled trailing edges can also be seen on the models in this article, but a quick Google investigation reveals that all of the models here should have been equipped with the early pylons with the straight trailing edge, such as those seen on the photos of N905NA, the real aircraft shown in this article. For more info on this subject see this thread at the Model Airliner Forum. Vertical stabilizer: One of the main critics of the otherwise acclaimed BigBird mold is the tail. What I can see is that the vertical fin tapers a bit much, making it too narrow on the upper end when seen in profile. It is also poorly refined, and it does not fit well onto the fuselage. Almost every other 747 vertical fin in 1:400 looks better. The Phoenix effort is often criticized because only its front end is attached to the fuselage, leaving a visible gap running along the aft half of its root. Other details: Refer to Yesterday's Airlines 747-100/200 molds in 1:400 scale review to get a look at other elements of these molds. I encourage you to make your own conclusions. The Future NG Models recently unveiled a series of new molds which included a 747-400 and a -200/100 mold. Many collectors were eagerly awaiting NG's 747-200 announcement as the current molds, though good and upgraded, are getting old. Crucially, they have cradle-type wings, and manufacturers don't want to use them too liberally. The exception to all that is Phoenix, their mold is not old, has slot-in wings, and they do use it, but, while it gets the job done, it is not the best mold available. Unfortunately, NG's announcement was bittersweet. While the mold does look promising, it also needs quite a bit of refinement before becoming acceptable. To become top-notch it needs a considerable redesign. You can find a comprehensive review of the NG 747-200 mold sample at Yesterday's Airlines. Jorge A. Zajia